The Utah Business and Employment Lawyer

Amid controversy, and with a pending United States Supreme Court decision lurking in the background - the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued updated guidance on discrimination, harassment and bias under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. A fact sheet created by the EEOC for small businesses addressing the new guidancecan be accessed here .  Under the PDA, employers are required to treat women affected by pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions in the same manner as other employees (or applicants for employment) with respect to leave time, attendance issues and other work-related restrictions. Employers cannot discriminate against employees because of their pregnancy, pregnancy related medical conditions, childbirth or past pregnancy, or because of an employer's intention, desire or potential to become pregnant. Such prohibition also includes discrimination on the basis of lactation or breastfeeding. The PDA also prohibits harassment because of ...

In an article last week by USA Today, reporter Jessica Guynn details allegations relating to the purported sexism that is rampant in Silicon Valley's technology industry and the technology profession in general. It's a good read for employees and employers who operate in industries typically dominated by male employees, such as construction, firefighting, law enforcement, accounting/finance and politics. Employers who operate businesses in such industries need to be extremely vigilant with implementing and enforcing sexual harassment policies and procedures. In addition, employers need to pay close attention to hiring, pay and promotion practices to avoid claims of gender discrimination in compensation, promotion and hiring decisions. Employees who work in such industries who suspect that they are being treated differently on the basis of gender should seek competent legal counsel who can assist employees with analyzing their situations and exploring possible legal remedi...

Last week, in a divided decision issued by Judge Lucero, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Kitchen v. Herbert, Case. No. 13-4178 , affirmed Judge Shelby's (U.S. District Court of Utah) decision holding that the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution protect those who wish to marry a person of the same sex in the same way they protect those who wish to marry a person of the opposite sex, and declared that Utah's Amendment 3 to its constitution banning same-sex marriage did not withstanding strict scrutiny because the right to marry is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution.   In a 108 page opinion with included a lengthy dissent from Judge Kelly, the Tenth Circuit concluded that the State of Utah may not deny a citizen benefit of the right to marry based solely on the sex of the person the citizen chooses to marry. For more information about the decision, and what Utah plans to do in response to the decision, yo...